A-From North Carolina.
B-A cat has appeared to have adopted a local Sasquatch family.
C-BF family of four: a Dad, Mom, one teenager, and a young child.
D-The human residents set up a feeding location.
E-The BFs take the food. Sometimes, daily. Sometimes, not for a week.
F-The food goes when the cat disappears.
G-In May 2008, the BF inspected the human’s pickup truck, leaving fingerprints and nose prints on the passenger window.
H-A local policeman collected fingerprints and palm prints, a full set, but refused to date and sign the card.
I-The humans have a video camera at the location. When it is working, the Sasquatch refuse to collect the food. When the camera quits, the Sasquatch resume their activity.
J-Reportedly, the Sasquatch cannot affect the recording operations, but seem to know when the system is operating and when it stops.
K-Two fleeting videos of the BF. One is the arm of the black BF father, and the other is the hand of the white teenager with pink skin.

We have eleven bits of information, some extremely important, and some not.
Location? Not as important except where the feeding occurs.
Pets? It takes enormous will for a pet to accept outsiders, specially from the forest, since the smell alone conveys danger.
Feeding? Interesting and important, as this would tell if in reality the BFs are vegetarians or allegedly carnivores as has been implied in other sites. This would also explain why other BFs are seen around camping grounds, cabins, or homes. Unless the food is being eaten by the cat (the food goes when the cat dissapears).
The Vehicle incident? Most likely curiosity because of some smell emanating from it or BF seeing itself against the glass, and trying to see if there was another BF inside.
Camera activity? Important, since many people have been trying to capture images of BF and have been unsuccessful. The thing to remember is that the Paterson film was taken with an old winding camera (no EMI/RFI) that was noisy when running. You had to push the trigger to unwind the coil, it may have had a DC motor assist depending on the model, but no EMI/RFI from that. If BF is actually sensitive to EMI/RFI, then they would stay away from power lines or anything with high voltage. If it was the frequency then they would stay away from anything that emanates within their sensitivity range.
Skin color? Of interest to a certain degree since this indicates that there is variety. Someone also pointed out that it is a bad thing specially for the Pink guy. True, since it cannot camouflage itself. It also means that this particular BF is not ostracized by the others. Since it would give away their whereabouts. Denoting emotions or feelings from the group.

On the Paranormal (Fringe) side of thinking, much has been alluded to the BF being a telepath. If this were true then the BF should be able to communicate in various languages. Why? Because due to our way of education, we are taught to think in words not in pictures. Only the people with a higher degree of intelligence think in pictures. The majority of us must say the words in our concious mind in order to communicate, once again because that is how we have been taught. It would be dificult for BF to communicate when we answer but not when it talks. Judging by the fact that they are eating, tells us that these are physical beings, it left fingerprints. And no one seems to have observed UFO activity when the BFs are near.

The questions then arise, do we really need to harrass this group by hunting, chasing them down for pictures/film? Why are they so eager to make contact with the NC family? How often do they visit? When during the day do they visit? Have they ever noticed the humans in the house? Do they care? Has anyone tried to make further contact? If the BFs can be seen from inside the house, then why not test with the camera and turn it on and off at intervals while they feed just to see how they react? I know they are not lab rats, but the more observations the better we can understand. What this family has in their backyard is the Holy Grail of BF research, yet no one is taking advantage of it.

Peace…

OK, there’s something else I can say. (Other than: let’s find out what we can about that print. There does appear to be enough to at least assert whether it’s mundane or hmmmmmmm.)

On another thread, I just saw a post asserting that the sasquatch is telepathic. You know, they could be. Hey, what do I know? But what is our evidence?

I am constantly hammering on scoftics for the total absence of evidence for their claims. You see, they honestly don’t think they have to do a single thing but sling brickbats at proponents – even if it involves making totally preposterous claims. That wasn’t a sasquatch; it was a moose, forced by injuries to run bipedally, with really flexible antlers, whose snout had obviously been bitten off by a wolf…

One wonders where scoftics get this ridiculous attitude, that they can say pretty much anything they want; not bother to educate themselves on the topic AT ALL, Ben Radford; and not have to substantiate, with a single lick of common sense, a single thing they say?

Well, I have an idea where they get it.

Not a way to go, I don’t think, to get into the habit of speculating things that can’t be proven.

OK, fine. Yet.

My first impression when I here people saying BFis “supernatural” is….”Oh great, this is JUST what we need.”

One does nothing to provide for the scientific support/proof of a creature’s existence by subscribing said creature paranormal powers and then using these powers to explain why it is so hard to find said creature. Before casting supernatural abilities on a creature, shouldn’t one have a better foundation for its scientifically accepted existence? The BF “supernatural/paranormal angle” is simple, BASIC, false logic. As scientists, shouldn’t we do and expect better?

Showing a wider angle shot of the whole configuration – including that nose print – could be useful. Hope they got such a shot and just haven’t shared it yet.

cryptidsrus: I second m_m with regard to your posts. Like I said: Big tent. I have learned from folks here, and I hope to keep doing it. Case in point: “The split between science and “spirit/religion” is entrenched in western society. I think the split never should have occurred.” We’ve probably hurt science by keeping it divorced too much from wonder. You don’t want your brains to fall out. But you don’t want to squeeze them so tight that you miss what’s right there.

By the way, I also liked your post on science and the supernatural. Not really much I can add there.

cryptidsrus- Your opinions are more than welcome here, don’t worry about that at all. You have a lot of good things to say. Anyway, that’s what this forum is for, to get our thoughts out and learn new things in a constructive, respectful way. And don’t worry about being “structurally precise”. Your posts are fine by me.

And actually, there is no such thing as “supernatural,”—just natural phenomenon we have not explained yet.

I couldn’t agree more with that statement. Remember folks: not so long ago, when the Big Bang concept was proposed—by a Catholic priest nonetheless!—mainstream scientists scoffed at the idea, saying it was unscientific because it was unprovable… until we learned about the deep space microwave radiation; and suddenly, we can measure the beginning of the Universe to an astonishing accuracy.

Do I agree with cryptidsrus in that I think Bigfoot posesses traits and abilities that could be considered ‘supernatural’ by some people? Not necessarily. But to me, considering that possibility does not trump my entire house of cards that is my belief system regarding the natural world.

That said, I still consider this —the fingerprint photo—to be inconsistent evidence—why didn’t they take pictures of the entire window? that would give us the scale reference many of us wish for— but I’m glad it has stemmed a very interesting discussion about the effectiveness of modern equipment to detect this elusive creature.

I should also point out that medicine is only one field where we’ve found out that today’s aboriginal mumbo-jumbo could be tomorrow’s science. (And that yesterday’s mumbo-jumbo is today’s science.)

But as we’ve seen with medicine, for us to do much of practical value with it, we have to wait for science to catch up.